Journals Library

Advanced

An error occurred retrieving publication content to display, please try again.

Home >> Journals >> Health Technology Assessment >> Page Not Found

Page not found (404)

Sorry - the page you requested could not be found.

Please choose a page from the navigation or try a website search above to find the information you need.

Home >> Journals >> Health Technology Assessment >> Volume {{metadata.Volume}} >> Issue {{metadata.Issue}}
Extended Research Article
i

View Award

Annual faecal immunochemical testing, with colonoscopy in positive cases, was generally acceptable to patients and would be cost-saving compared to three-yearly colonoscopy, although it has lower sensitivity, resulting in missed lesions.

{{author}}{{author}}{{($index > metadata.AuthorsAndEtalArray.length-1) ? ',' : '.'}}

Wendy Atkin 1,*,†, Amanda J Cross 1,*, Ines Kralj-Hans 1, Eilidh MacRae 1, Carolyn Piggott 2, Sheena Pearson 2, Kate Wooldrage 1, Jeremy Brown 1, Fiona Lucas 1, Aaron Prendergast 1, Natalie Marchevsky 1, Bhavita Patel 1, Kevin Pack 1, Rosemary Howe 1, Hanna Skrobanski 3, Robert Kerrison 3, Nicholas Swart 4, Julia Snowball 2, Stephen W Duffy 5, Stephen Morris 4, Christian von Wagner 3, Stephen Halloran 2

1 Cancer Screening and Prevention Research Group, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, UK
2 Bowel Cancer Screening Programme Southern Hub, Guildford, UK
3 Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK
4 Department of Applied Health Research, University College London, London, UK
5 Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventative Medicine, Queen Mary University, London, UK
* Corresponding author Email: amanda.cross@imperial.ac.uk

† In memoriam

Funding: {{metadata.Funding}}

{{metadata.Journal}} Volume: {{metadata.Volume}}, Issue: {{metadata.Issue}}, Published in {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'MMMM yyyy'}}

https://doi.org/{{metadata.DOI}}

Citation:{{author}}{{ (($index < metadata.AuthorsArray.length-1) && ($index <=6)) ? ', ' : '' }}{{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length <= 6) ? '.' : '' }} {{(metadata.AuthorsArray.length > 6) ? 'et al. ' : ''}}. {{metadata.JournalShortName}} {{metadata.PublicationDate | date:'yyyy'}};{{metadata.Volume}}({{metadata.Issue}})

Crossmark status check

Report Content

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

The full text of this issue is available as a PDF document from the Toolkit section on this page.

If you would like to receive a notification when this project publishes in the NIHR Journals Library, please submit your email address below.

Responses to this report

No responses have been published.

 

If you would like to submit a response to this publication, please do so using the form below:

Comments submitted to the NIHR Journals Library are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our readers to debate issues raised in research reports published in the Journals Library. We aim to post within 14 working days all responses that contribute substantially to the topic investigated, as determined by the Editors.  Non-relevant comments will be deleted.

Your name and affiliations will be published with your comment.

Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. The Editors may add, remove, or edit comments at their absolute discretion.

By submitting your response, you are stating that you agree to the terms & conditions

An error has occurred in processing the XML document

© NIHR 2024